Tweet
Has anyone got a decent photo of a sub adult and a MM Phormictopus atrichomatus ?
Only confirmed photos please, NOT photos taken from the internet.
I bought 2 spiders earier in the year as Phormictopus atrichomatus, both about 3inch LS.
I havent taken much notice of them apart from routine maintenance like changing water and feeding.
Both have been sexed as males by recent examination of their moults by myself. Since their recent moults their colouring has changed and now they look like they may be different species.
Spider 1.
Copper sheen on carapace. White hairs on abdomen. Strong colour difference between the femor and the patella which makes the femor look thicker, defined stripes on the patella and tibia. This spider looks more 'pink' and 'hairy' overall than spider 2
Spider 2
Copper sheen on carapace (not as strong colour as spider 1) Pink/tan hairs on abdomen. Slight colour difference between the femor and patella, faint stripes on the patella and fibia.
I didnt photo or draw the Gonopore of either spiders but from memory there was a definate difference in shape.
Spider 1. Had a Gonopore but couldnt see any accessory organs even at x80, neither was there signs of spermathecae, uterus externus or bursa copulatrix
Spider 2. Had both Gonopore and accessory organs, suspected at x20 but clearly seen at x80
I'll try and get some decent photos asap.
Only confirmed photos please, NOT photos taken from the internet.
I bought 2 spiders earier in the year as Phormictopus atrichomatus, both about 3inch LS.
I havent taken much notice of them apart from routine maintenance like changing water and feeding.
Both have been sexed as males by recent examination of their moults by myself. Since their recent moults their colouring has changed and now they look like they may be different species.
Spider 1.
Copper sheen on carapace. White hairs on abdomen. Strong colour difference between the femor and the patella which makes the femor look thicker, defined stripes on the patella and tibia. This spider looks more 'pink' and 'hairy' overall than spider 2
Spider 2
Copper sheen on carapace (not as strong colour as spider 1) Pink/tan hairs on abdomen. Slight colour difference between the femor and patella, faint stripes on the patella and fibia.
I didnt photo or draw the Gonopore of either spiders but from memory there was a definate difference in shape.
Spider 1. Had a Gonopore but couldnt see any accessory organs even at x80, neither was there signs of spermathecae, uterus externus or bursa copulatrix
Spider 2. Had both Gonopore and accessory organs, suspected at x20 but clearly seen at x80
I'll try and get some decent photos asap.
Phormictopus cancerides (Latreille 1806)
Distribution: Hispaniola (Haiti).
Diagnosis: Often confused with Brachypelma spinicrus (now Citharacanthus spinicrus (Latreille 1819)). C. spinicrus has a golden iridescent hairs on carapace and femurs of all legs. [Smith 1986]. Haitian representatives of P. cancerides have from blue to red iridescent hairs on the caparace and the femurs. [Schmidt 2003]. Females are distinguishable from other species by the shape of spermathecae, males by the bent metatarsus (except P. atrichomatus), from P. atrichomatus by more bent apical end of embolus and distinctly short PI keel. Metatarsus I touches a retrolateral tibial apophysis when is bent. Another tool of determination can be an absence of retrolateral protuberance on palpal tibia. Coloration in living specimens can be also considered as criterion of determination [Rudloff 2008].
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Phormictopus atrichomatus Schmidt 1991
Distribution: Hispaniola (northern part of island).
Diagnosis: P. atrichomatus differs from P. cancerides by bronze pubescens on carapace (contra violet pubescens in P. cancerides). Metatarsi I is distinctly bent as in P. cancerides. In males an apical part of embolus is distinctly longer than in P. cancerides, keel arangement of male palpal bulb and prolateral tibial apophysis are also distinguishable from P. cancerides. The prolateral tibial apophysis in P. cancerides has incrassate base tapering to the apex and appears as rounded triangle. The prolateral tibial apophysis in P. atrichomatus has finger-like shape. Palpal tibia has subapical protuberance on retrolateral face, in P. cancerides is absent. Spermathecae has two seminal receptacles joined in base, each receptaculum has uniform triangular shape without rounded lobe at apex [Rudloff 2008].
Distribution: Hispaniola (Haiti).
Diagnosis: Often confused with Brachypelma spinicrus (now Citharacanthus spinicrus (Latreille 1819)). C. spinicrus has a golden iridescent hairs on carapace and femurs of all legs. [Smith 1986]. Haitian representatives of P. cancerides have from blue to red iridescent hairs on the caparace and the femurs. [Schmidt 2003]. Females are distinguishable from other species by the shape of spermathecae, males by the bent metatarsus (except P. atrichomatus), from P. atrichomatus by more bent apical end of embolus and distinctly short PI keel. Metatarsus I touches a retrolateral tibial apophysis when is bent. Another tool of determination can be an absence of retrolateral protuberance on palpal tibia. Coloration in living specimens can be also considered as criterion of determination [Rudloff 2008].
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Phormictopus atrichomatus Schmidt 1991
Distribution: Hispaniola (northern part of island).
Diagnosis: P. atrichomatus differs from P. cancerides by bronze pubescens on carapace (contra violet pubescens in P. cancerides). Metatarsi I is distinctly bent as in P. cancerides. In males an apical part of embolus is distinctly longer than in P. cancerides, keel arangement of male palpal bulb and prolateral tibial apophysis are also distinguishable from P. cancerides. The prolateral tibial apophysis in P. cancerides has incrassate base tapering to the apex and appears as rounded triangle. The prolateral tibial apophysis in P. atrichomatus has finger-like shape. Palpal tibia has subapical protuberance on retrolateral face, in P. cancerides is absent. Spermathecae has two seminal receptacles joined in base, each receptaculum has uniform triangular shape without rounded lobe at apex [Rudloff 2008].
Comment